Rip Van Winkle's Observation on player, selector, management and fan

[thebest]

hi all,
I was a regular during the pre-WC era in BC. Last match I saw was our historical match against India; then today. That mean I am the Rip Van Winkle. I woke up from sleep and visit BC and have the following observation
Selectors
1. as old hands in BC could confirm I was pro-Faruq led selection committee. Yes I differed with them (For example, Tamim's and JO's inclusion in WC). But I understood their logic. They knew what they were doing. The socalled core of today is developed by them. They introduced new player but not four at the same time or againest strong opposition. Mushfiq, Farhad, Sakib, Tamim, Rajjak, Rasel all were introduced against weaker opposition. They have failure. For example Mehrab. But most of their experiment were successful.
2. They gave enough time to youngsters to gel with the team. If I remember correctly Mushy, Tamim, Sakib at least have one series with the team before their debut.
3. They tried to give enough chance to the players before dumping. Old player Sujon, JO and Pilot got enough chance to prove that they have in it to represent Bangladesh. I remember there was threads againest Sujon (by Sauron?), JO (spitty), Pilot (by Miraz) before they were dumped. fan favourite Tusher Imran, Alok I think got enough chance to prove themselves.

Compare to that

1. I have serious doubt about the present selection committee. I fail to understand their logic. They suddenly call four players to play againest the second strongest team of the world. And they failed miserbly (except may be Rakib). When a much weaker team is coming within a week why experiment now.
2. Did the new players gel with the team. I clearly saw miscommunication between new and old player.
3. Did anybody in sane mind could answer in positively why Mushy, Zunaid, Rasel or Mash was dropped.

Team Management
This include the coach and the captain
1. Dave did not go for charm offensive. To me he was a bloody professional (this include his shameless attempt to be coach of India). he tried to improve the team. The result we were in WC 2nd round. In media there was a rumor that he did not talk during his off form period. After today's performance, if I was the coach I would not have talk with him. It is simply waste of time talking with Ashraful.
2. Dave came after WC2003 and first assignment was against Aussi in their backyard. He never uttered a word in public that could demoralized the team. The result we passed with flying colors. to me that aus tour is one of the best tour that we ever took.
3. HB was unimaginative too remote controlled captain. But he has respect of his team. He never let his team mate down infront of media.

Compare to that

1. I think Siddons want to please the journalist (look at today's prothom alo). he should more concentrate in players batting technique than looking for good relation with players, media and fan
2. Siddons comment that we are nobody in International cricket is hard truth. But does he need to utter it in public. Whom he is trying to convince?
3. Ash made a serious judgment of error by blaming af Rakib in front of media after the second ODI. His performance as captain today did not make him any different from HB. Single were leaked when Petersson and Smith was having trouble of playing Sakib and Rajjak. Btw can the team management explain why Dhiman came before Farhad today

Players
Last time I saw players were full of confidence. remember Mash declared we would beat India before a single ball was bowled. Every body was sure what his role in the team. JO to hang is bat, SN to bully, aftab has the license to kill, HB , Mushy and Sakib to accumulate, Ash was the floater depending upon the situation. while Rasel would bowl on trot, Mash and Raj would strike , Rafiq and Sakib were to choke the opposition. The team was enthusiastic in the field and committed

But what I saw today

players either do not know or forgot what their role in the team. Nobody tried to hang in there; it seems that everybody has the license to kill. with so many youngster I feel more committed effort in the field. It seems to me bowlers do not know how to bowl. Ok they have a very small total to defend. But this is not new.

Fan
last time we were more enthusiastic and hopeful then the ground reality but today we are expecting to win every time. But the fact remain we still are the minnow.

I would rather conclude we actually took two steps back since the heyday of 17th March 2007

[Miraz]

Excellent observation thebest. I fully concur.

[Rizvi]

Hmmm....

What an angle!! So HB and Whatmore era had better complete team approaches than he highly advertised Ash and Siddons! Interesting...

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by thebest
I would rather conclude we actually took two steps back since the heyday of 17th March 2007

Good observations I must say. But I think the selection problem is with the management excluding Siddons. I do agree, however, that Siddons may want to be too cool in front of the journalists.

Trying different things every single time is not a feasible solution. If you try an alternative, try it for a long period of time until your team fully understands the concept. That's what we're missing, IMO.

[sadi]

Good thread.... I agree on most of the issue....

Selectors hasn't convinced me yet. To me, they do look like short sighted, get easily excited by one or two domestic cricket performance, and afraid to make the tough decision.

I wil give coach sometime. Ash's captaincy was disappointing to say the least. He has lost his cool numerous time and it is definitely effecting his judgement. I am not convinced he can take the pressure. The only problem is right at this moment, we do not have an option at all.

We are definitely passing one of our toughest time in our cricket history. Hopefully, good days are just around the corner and we can turn it around from Ireland series.

[Fazal]

thanks thebest... you covered all.. nothing to add.

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally Posted by thebest
3. Did anybody in sane mind could answer in positively why Mushy, Zunaid, Rasel or Mash was dropped.

Leaving out Mashrafee was 100% justified. In fact he got away easy. He should've been benched for the entire series. Meanwhile we could give Shahadat a decent run in the ODI, which he thoroughly deserved.

2. Dave came after WC2003 and first assignment was against Aussi in their backyard. He never uttered a word in public that could demoralized the team. The result we passed with flying colors. to me that aus tour is one of the best tour that we ever took.

Are you kidding me? It "felt good" only because we could prove Hookes wrong. Otherwise, the results were usual rubbish. The fact is our expectation was way too low after the disastrous 2003 WC, and nowadays our expections are much higher.

I know how our recent performance feels like. But it's no excuse for losing sanity and cherishing memories of "bad old days".

[reyme]

I disagree with Spitty wrt "bad old days". Just compare the result:
Dav's first assignment with #1 AUS in AUS after a teriible WC03 performance
Sid's first assignment with #5 NZ in NZ after a good WC07 performance

If I draw a 4 year performance chart relative to condition or background, I see a downward curve...

[reyme]

It seems we are starting all over again from the scratch. We could not have any any worse without Siddons. For a team like ours we needed McInnes.

[thebest]

spitty,
From the scorecard I find that Mash bowled badly in two consecutive ODI. why test performance should be count in selecting ODI. there are enough example where a rubbish test bowler (our own sujon for eg) proved to be an effective ODI bowler and vice versa (for example Hoggard).
Regarding the second one you have your opinion. But at that time not only Hooky (RIP) but a good number of fans thought one day test.
the level of expectation is a different issue. It is the matching the expectation that count.
Peace

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally Posted by reyme
I disagree with Spitty wrt "bad old days". Just compare the result:
Dav's first assignment with #1 AUS in AUS after a teriible WC03 performance
Sid's first assignment with #5 NZ in NZ after a good WC07 performance

If I draw a 4 year performance chart relative to condition or background, I see a downward curve...

#1 and #5 ranking doesn't matter. New Zealand tours can be very tough for subcontinental teams, hardly a much easier job than touring Australia. Only Pakistan have some notable success there because NZ batsmen have very poor record against real quick bowlers.

I don't know how do you see a downward curve, when our a performance curve has been non-existent. The curve people speak about is a plain line which is always far below acceptable level, with some occasional upward spikes.

Under Dav we've seen handful of sub 100 scores, many sub 150 scores and lots of below 200 scores. We're not progressing, but we're not going backwards either. Why? Because we've always been at rock bottom.

[Spitfire_x86]

Originally Posted by thebest
spitty,
From the scorecard I find that Mash bowled badly in two consecutive ODI. why test performance should be count in selecting ODI. there are enough example where a rubbish test bowler (our own sujon for eg) proved to be an effective ODI bowler and vice versa (for example Hoggard).

It was not just his bowling in tests, rather his overall lethargic and uninterested approach to the game. Who saw the tests live knows what I'm speaking about.

Regarding the second one you have your opinion. But at that time not only Hooky (RIP) but a good number of fans thought one day test.
the level of expectation is a different issue. It is the matching the expectation that count.

No, predicting 2 day test would be rather more realistic. 1 day test was simply a fanciful thought.

We didn't really do much better than expected (batting wise). Our bowlers got some wickets in tests (they still scored 500+, we were ecstatic because our bowlers only delivered what was considered the usual "bad" performance of touring teams against the all conquering Aussies, instead of creating any new records), and in the T2 Day 1 we scored 280+ for 8 wickets. Apart from that our performance in the entire tour was forgettable.

[reyme]

AUSTRALIA:
1st Test : BD 97, 178 = 275 AUS 407
Result: Lost by Inning and 132

2nd Test: BD 295, 163 = 458 AUS: 556
Result: Lost by Inning + 98 runs

NEW ZEALAND:

1st test: BD: 137, 254 = 391 NZ: 357, 39
Result: Lost by 9 wickets

2nd test: BD: 143, 113 = 256 NZ: 393
Result: Lost by Inning and 137 runs

Agreed, both terrible, marginally better result maybe in australia.
But after 4 years? At the beginning of 2007 we were flying, take a look at KngtBD's signature, we had somnay ODI wins (thanks to ZIM)

but all of a sudden it seems we forgot everything and started over....